COMMODITIES TRANSACTION TAX RULES, 2013
NOTIFICATION NO. 46/2013 [F.NO.142/09/2013-TPL]/SO 1769(E), DATED 19-6-2013
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 133 of the Finance Act, 2013 (17 of 2013), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules relating to commodities transaction tax, namely:-
Short title and commencement.
1. (1) These rules may be called the Commodities Transaction Tax Rules, 2013.
(2) They shall come into force on the 1st day of July, 2013.
Definitions.
2. (1) In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires,-
| (a) | "Act" means the Finance Act, 2013 (17 of 2013); | |
| (b) | "authorised bank" means any bank as may be appointed by the Reserve Bank of India as its agent under the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 45 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (2 of 1934); | |
| (c) | "Form" means a Form set out in the Appendix to these rules. |
(2) Words and expressions used and not defined in these rules but defined in the Act, the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1952 (74 of 1952), the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), or the rules made thereunder, shall have the meanings respectively assigned to them in those Acts and rules.
Agricultural commodities.
3. For the purposes of clause (7) of section 116 of the Act, the agricultural commodities shall be the following, namely:-
| (i) | Almond | |
| (ii) | Barley | |
| (iii) | Cardamom | |
| (iv) | Castor Seed | |
| (v) | Channa/Gram | |
| (vi) | Copra | |
| (vii) | Coriander/Dhaniya | |
| (viii) | Cotton | |
| (ix) | Cotton seed Oilcake/Kapasia Khali | |
| (x) | Guar Seed | |
| (xi) | Isabgul Seed | |
| (xii) | Jeera (Cumin Seed) | |
| (xiii) | Kapas | |
| (xiv) | Maize Feed | |
| (xv) | Pepper | |
| (xvi) | Potato | |
| (xvii) | Rape/Mustard Seed | |
| (xviii) | Raw Jute | |
| (xix) | Red Chilli | |
| (xx) | Soya bean/seed | |
| (xxi) | Soymeal | |
| (xxii) | Turmeric | |
| (xxiii) | Wheat |
Rounding off value of taxable commodities transaction, commodities transaction tax, etc.
4. The value of taxable commodities transaction and the amount of commodities transaction tax, interest and penalty payable, and the amount of refund due, under the provisions of Chapter VII of the Act shall be rounded off to the nearest rupee and, for this purpose, where such amount contains a part of a rupee consisting of paise then, if such part is fifty paise or more, it shall be increased to one rupee and if such part is less than fifty paise it shall be ignored.
Payment of commodities transaction tax.
5. Every recognised association, who is required to collect and pay commodities transaction tax under section 119 of the Act, shall pay the amount of such tax to the credit of the Central Government by remitting it into any branch of the Reserve Bank of India or of the State Bank of India or of any authorised Bank accompanied by a commodities transaction tax challan.
Return of taxable commodities transactions.
6. (1) The return of taxable commodities transactions required to be furnished under sub-section (1) of section 120 of the Act shall be in Form No. 1, verified in the manner indicated therein, and may be furnished in any of the following manners, namely:-
| (i) | furnishing the return in paper form; | |
| (ii) | furnishing the return electronically under digital signature: |
Provided that where the return is furnished in the manner provided in clause (i) the particulars required to be furnished in the Schedules to Form No. 1 referred to in sub-rule (1) shall be furnished on a computer media, in accordance with the following, -
| (a) | the computer media conforms to the following specifications:- |
| (i) | CD ROM of 650 MB capacity or higher capacity; or | |
| (ii) | Digital Video Disc; |
| (b) | if the data relating to the Schedules are copied using data compression or backup software utility, the corresponding software utility or procedure for its decompression or restoration shall also be furnished; and | |
| (c) | the return shall be accompanied by a certificate regarding clean and virus free data. |
(2) The return of taxable commodities transaction entered into during a financial year shall be furnished on or before the 30th June immediately following that financial year.
(3) The Director-General of Income-tax (Systems) shall specify the procedures, formats and standards for ensuring secure capture and transmission of data and shall also be responsible for evolving and implementing appropriate security, archival and retrieval policies in relation to furnishing the returns in the manners specified in clause (ii) of sub-rule (1).
Return by whom to be signed.
7. The return under sub-section (1) of section 120 of the Act shall be signed and verified in the case of a recognised association, -
| (i) | being a company, by the managing director or a director thereof; and | |
| (ii) | in any other case, by the principal officer thereof. |
Time limit to be specified in the notice calling for return of taxable commodities transaction.
8. Where an assessee fails to furnish the return under sub-section (1) of section 120 of the Act within the time specified in sub-rule (2) of rule 6, the Assessing Officer may issue a notice to such person requiring him to furnish, within thirty days from the date of service of the notice, a return in the Form prescribed in rule 6 and verified in the manner indicated therein.
Notice of demand.
9. Where any tax, interest or penalty is payable in consequence of any order passed under the provisions of Chapter VII of the Act, the Assessing Officer shall serve upon the assessee a notice of demand in Form No. 2 specifying the sum so payable.
Prescribed time for refund of tax to the person from whom such amount was collected.
10. Every assessee, in case any amount is refunded to it on assessment under sub-section (2) of section 121 of the Act, shall, within thirty days from the date of receipt of such amount, refund the same to the concerned person from whom it was collected.
Form of appeal to Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).
11. (1) An appeal under sub-section (1) of section 129 of the Act to the Commissioner (Appeals) shall be made in Form No. 3.
(2) The form of appeal prescribed by sub-rule (1), the grounds of appeal and the form of verification appended thereto relating to an assessee shall be signed and verified by the person who is authorised to sign the return of taxable commodities transactions under rule 7, as applicable to the assessee.
Form of appeal to Appellate Tribunal.
12. An appeal under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 130 of the Act to the Appellate Tribunal shall be made in Form No. 4, and where the appeal is made by the assessee, the form of appeal, the grounds of appeal and the form of verification appended thereto shall be signed by the person specified in rule 7.
APPENDIX [See rule 6 of Commodities Transaction Tax Rules, 2013] RETURN OF TAXABLE COMMODITIES TRANSACTIONS |
[See rule 9 of Commodities Transaction Tax Rules, 2013] Notice of demand |
[See rule 11 of Commodities Transaction Tax Rules, 2013] Appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) Designation of the Commissioner (Appeals) |
[See rule 12 of Commodities Transaction Tax Rules, 2013]
Form of appeal to the Appellate Tribunal
in Omkar Nagreeya Sahkari Bank Ltd.
ITAT's Single Member bench expresses grave displeasure on professional misconduct of Chartered Accountant; Dismisses application filed by CA in his "personal capacity" for recalling order sheet
ITAT's Single Member bench expresses grave displeasure on professional misconduct of Chartered Accountant; Dismisses application filed by CA in his "personal capacity" for recalling order sheet
IT : Where assessee was awarded a contract and in terms of contract certain amount was withheld by contractee towards retention money for satisfactory execution of contract by assessee, retention money did not represent assessee's accrued income
■■■
[2013] 33 taxmann.com 139 (Gujarat)
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Director of Income-tax ( International Taxation)
v.
Ballast Nedam International*
AKIL KURESHI AND MS. SONIA GOKANI, JJ.
TAX APPEAL NO. 144 of 2013†
MARCH 28, 2013
Section 5 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income - Accrual of [Retention money] - Assessment year 2002-03 - One 'A' awarded a contract to assessee for construction of a project - In terms of contract executed between parties certain amount was withheld by 'A' towards retention money for satisfactory execution of contract - Assessee claimed that it had no right on such retention money till completion of work and submission of mechanical certificate and, therefore, it did not form part of its income - Assessing Officer held that retention money represented assessee's accrued income - Whether in view of decision of Gujarat High Court in case of Anup Engineering Ltd. v. CIT [2001] 247 ITR 457/114 Taxman 584 retention money could not be said to have accrued to assessee - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, aforesaid amount did not represent assessee's accrued income - Held, yes [Paras 6 & 7] [In favour of assessee]
NEW DELHI: Government has launched a wide-ranging surveillance programme that will give security agencies and even income tax officials the ability to tap directly into e-mails and phone calls without oversight by courts or parliament, several sources said.
The expanded surveillance, which the government says will help safeguard national security, has alarmed privacy advocates at a time when allegations of massive US digital snooping beyond American shores has set off a global furore.
The expanded surveillance, which the government says will help safeguard national security, has alarmed privacy advocates at a time when allegations of massive US digital snooping beyond American shores has set off a global furore.
The expanded surveillance, which the government says will help safeguard national security, has alarmed privacy advocates at a time when allegations of massive US digital snooping beyond American shores has set off a global furore.
"If India doesn't want to look like an authoritarian regime, it needs to be transparent about who will be authorized to collect data, what data will be collected, how it will be used, and how the right to privacy will be protected," said Cynthia Wong, an Internet researcher at New York-basedHuman Rights Watch.
The Central Monitoring System (CMS) was announced in 2011 but there has been no public debate and the government has said little about how it will work or how it will ensure that the system is not abused.
The government started to quietly roll the system out state by state in April this year, according to government officials. Eventually it will be able to target any of India's 900 million landline and mobile phone subscribers and 120 million Internet users.
Interior ministry spokesman K.S. Dhatwalia said he did not have details of CMS and therefore could not comment on the privacy concerns. A spokeswoman for the telecom ministry, which will oversee CMS, did not respond to queries.
Officials said making details of the project public would limit its effectiveness as a clandestine intelligence-gathering tool.
"Security of the country is very important. All countries have these surveillance programmes," said a senior telecommunications ministry official, defending the need for a large-scale eavesdropping system like CMS.
"If India doesn't want to look like an authoritarian regime, it needs to be transparent about who will be authorized to collect data, what data will be collected, how it will be used, and how the right to privacy will be protected," said Cynthia Wong, an Internet researcher at New York-basedHuman Rights Watch.
The Central Monitoring System (CMS) was announced in 2011 but there has been no public debate and the government has said little about how it will work or how it will ensure that the system is not abused.
The government started to quietly roll the system out state by state in April this year, according to government officials. Eventually it will be able to target any of India's 900 million landline and mobile phone subscribers and 120 million Internet users.
Interior ministry spokesman K.S. Dhatwalia said he did not have details of CMS and therefore could not comment on the privacy concerns. A spokeswoman for the telecom ministry, which will oversee CMS, did not respond to queries.
Officials said making details of the project public would limit its effectiveness as a clandestine intelligence-gathering tool.
"Security of the country is very important. All countries have these surveillance programmes," said a senior telecommunications ministry official, defending the need for a large-scale eavesdropping system like CMS.
"You can see terrorists getting caught, you see crimes being stopped. You need surveillance. This is to protect you and your country," said the official, who is directly involved in setting up the project. He did not want to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject.
NO INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT
The new system will allow the government to listen to and tape phone conversations, read e-mails and text messages, monitor posts on Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn and track searches on Google of selected targets, according to interviews with two other officials involved in setting up the new surveillance programme, human rights activists and cyber experts.
In 2012, India sent in 4,750 requests to Google Inc for user data, the highest in the world after the United States.
Security agencies will no longer need to seek a court order for surveillance or depend, as they do now, on Internet or telephone service providers to give them the data, the government officials said.
The new system will allow the government to listen to and tape phone conversations, read e-mails and text messages, monitor posts on Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn and track searches on Google of selected targets, according to interviews with two other officials involved in setting up the new surveillance programme, human rights activists and cyber experts.
In 2012, India sent in 4,750 requests to Google Inc for user data, the highest in the world after the United States.
Security agencies will no longer need to seek a court order for surveillance or depend, as they do now, on Internet or telephone service providers to give them the data, the government officials said.
The top bureaucrat in the federal interior ministry and his state-level deputies will have the power to approve requests for surveillance of specific phone numbers, e-mails or social media accounts, the government officials said.
While it is not unusual for governments to have equipment at telecommunication companies and service providers, they are usually required to submit warrants or be subject to other forms of independent oversight.
IT : Depreciation is allowable on amount paid for goodwill being future profits
■■■
[2013] 34 taxmann.com 9 (Karnataka)
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle
v.
Manipal Universal Learning (P.) Ltd.*
N. KUMAR AND B. MANOHAR, JJ.
IT APPEAL NO. 61 OF 2007†
APRIL 1, 2013
Section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Depreciation - Allowance/rate of [Goodwill] - Assessment year 2003-04 - Assessee purchased rights of distance learning division from another company and amount of Rs. 51.63 crore was reflected in sale agreement - Assessee revealed price of such rights and claimed depreciation on revalued rights at Rs. 98.73 crore - Assessing Officer held that excess consideration paid over value of net assets was in nature of goodwill paid for future profits and, therefore, allowed depreciation only on value mentioned in agreement - Supreme Court in CIT v. SMIFS Securities Ltd. [2012] 24 taxmann.com 222 has held that goodwill is an asset under Explanation 3(b) to section 32(1) and, therefore, depreciation is allowable even on goodwill - Whether following same, depreciation was to be allowed on revalued rights - Held, yes [Para 5] [In favour of assessee]
CASE REVIEW
CIT v. SMIFS Securities Ltd. [2012] 24 taxmann.com 222/210 Taxman 428 (SC) (para 5) followed.
CASES REFERRED TO
CIT v. SMIFS Securities Ltd. [2012] 24 taxmann.com 222/210 Taxman 428 (SC) (para 5).
K.V. Arvind for the Appellant. S. Parthasarathi for the Respondent.
JUDGMENT
N. Kumar, J. - The Revenue has preferred this appeal challenging the order of the Tribunal holding that business or commercial rights acquired will be eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) and consideration paid for business or commercial rights is eligible for depreciation. No amount can be considered as representing the goodwill on which no depreciation is admissible. Therefore, the assessing authority was directed to reduce the quantum of advance from the business and commercial rights valued by the assessee to ascertain the amounts on which depreciation will be allowed.
2. This appeal was admitted to consider the following substantial question of law:
"Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee would be entitled to claim depreciation in respect of an amount of Rs.98,73,25,000-00 (including goodwill) and not the amount of Rs.51,63,00,000-00 as reflected in the sale agreement and ICDS Ltd., for purchase of distance learning division?"
3. The assessee has agreed in the sale agreement the price of Rs.51,63,00,000-00 as the value of the SMU agency rights. On the very next day, the assessee has chosen to revalue such rights to Rs.98,73,25,000-00 and claimed depreciation on the revalued rights. The assessing authority held that the excess consideration paid over the value of the net assets is in the nature of goodwill paid for the future' profits of the business. Therefore, he allowed the depreciation only on the value mentioned in the agreement.
4. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who affirmed the said order. However, the Tribunal allowed the depreciation to the entire extent. Aggrieved by the same, the Revenue is before this Court.
5. The Apex Court in the case of CIT v. SMIFS Securities Ltd. [2012] 24 taxmann.com 222/210 Taxman 428 has held that Explanation 3 to Section 32(1) of the Act, which defines the expression 'asset' includes intangible asset like goodwill. Therefore, the goodwill is an asset under Explanation 3(b) to section 32(1) of the Act. Therefore, the depreciation is leviable even on the goodwill. In view of the law declared by the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment, the substantial question of law framed is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No merits. Dismissed.
SB IT : Explanation 5 to section 32 introduced with effect from 1-4-2002 is only prospective and has no application to assessment year 1998-99
■■■
[2013] 34 taxmann.com 8 (Karnataka)
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle
v.
Mysore Cements Ltd.*
N. KUMAR AND B. MANOHAR, JJ.
IT APPEAL NO. 54 OF 2007†
APRIL 1, 2013
Section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Depreciation - Allowance/rate of [Claim for depreciation] - Assessment year 1998-99 - Whether Explanation 5 to section 32 introduced with effect from 1-4-2002 which contemplates compulsory deduction of depreciation in those cases where no depreciation has been claimed is only prospective and it has no application to assessment year 1998-99 - Held, yes [Para 4] [In favour of assessee]
CASE REVIEW
CIT v. Mysore Cements Ltd. [IT Appeal No. 3101of 2005, dated 9-3-2010] (para 6) followed.
CASES REFERRED TO
CIT v. Mysore Cements Ltd. [IT Appeal No. 3101of 2005, dated 9-3-2010] (para 5).
K.V. Arvind for the Appellant. S. Parthasarathi for the Respondent.
JUDGMENT
N. Kumar, J. - The Revenue has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the Tribunal which has up held the order of the appellate authority directing the assessing authority to withdraw the depreciation.
2. This appeal was admitted on 18.09.2007 to consider the following substantial question of law:
"Whether the Appellate Authorities were right in holding that no depreciation can be allowed when the assessee has not put forward the claim without considering the amended provisions of Section 32 of the Act which contemplates the compulsory deduction of depreciation in those cases where no depreciation has been claimed ?"
3. The assessee did not claim depreciation in the return filed by him. However, the Assessing Authority relying on Explanation (5) to Section 32(1) of the Act, introduced with effect from 01.04.2002 inserted by the Finance Act, 2001, granted exemption.
4. The assessee challenged the said order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) contending that the said amendment is only prospective and it has no application to the assessment year 1998-99. The appellate authority accepted the said contention and set aside the order of the assessing authority and granted deletion of depreciation. Aggrieved by the same, the Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal, which rightly dismissed the appeal.
5. This Court in the case of CIT v. Mysore Cements Ltd. [IT Appeal No.3101/05 decided on 9th March, 2010] has held that the said amendment is only prospective in nature.
6. In view of the aforesaid judgment, the order passed by the appellate authority is in order. No case for interference is made out. The substantial question of law is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Appeal dismissed.
LATARegards,
Pawan Singla
BA (Hon's), LLB
Audit Officer
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment